Back
Transfers POCSO Case to CID After 'Total Ignorance' of Police Investigation
In a scathing indictment of the police’s handling of a sexual assault case involving a child, the today transferred the investigation to the , ordering a probe. A Division Bench of Justice Vrushali V. Joshi and Justice Sandesh D. Patil found that the investigating officer had committed “serious lapses” including disclosing the victim’s identity, failing to record the victim’s statement in a child‑friendly manner, and not maintaining any semblance of a proper – conduct the Court described as reflecting a “lackadaisical approach and total ignorance” of the special safeguards under the POCSO Act.
The Shattered Promise of a Gurukul
The case stems from a First Information Report (No. 317/2025) registered at , District Ratnagiri, for offences under the , and . The petitioner, the mother of the victim, approached the High Court in a criminal writ petition alleging that her daughter, a student at a Gurukul where the alleged incident took place, had been failed at every turn by the investigation. According to the plea, the police officer leaked the most sensitive information – the child’s name, home address and mobile number – in official records, a direct violation of the confidentiality mandate of the POCSO Act. Further, the omitted crucial POCSO provisions, and the victim’s statement was callously taken inside the police station instead of in a safe, child‑friendly setting.
A That Never Was
When the Court summoned the Investigating Officer to produce the , the reply left the bench flabbergasted. Instead of a bound, day‑by‑day record mandated by Section 192 of the , the officer handed over loose sheets. On a subsequent date, after the Superintendent of Police, Ratnagiri, Nitin D. Bhagate was directed to appear, the same loose papers were presented – now stitched together with black tape and all purportedly written in the same handwriting on a single day. “We were shocked by the lackadaisical approach and total ignorance of the Investigating Officer about the provisions of law, especially the special Act such as POCSO Act,” the judges observed in their order.
The Constitutional Guardian Steps In
The High Court emphasised that the has repeatedly held in decisions like , and that the failure to meticulously note down investigative steps undermines the right to a , and that constitutional courts possess ample power under Article 226 to transfer a probe when the existing one lacks credibility. “ may be quite difficult unless there is a ,” the bench said, quoting the apex court. Noting that more than eight months had been wasted in a shoddy investigation – and that the Superintendent of Police’s offer to hand the case to a senior woman Police Inspector did not inspire confidence – the Court concluded that “this is a fit case where the powers under Article 226 … should be exercised for doing between the parties.”
A Clean Slate for Justice
The final order directs that the entire investigation be transferred to the , and that it be conducted – afresh, from the beginning – under the personal supervision of the Additional Director General of Police, State CID. All papers are to be handed over immediately. The Court has also kept the matter pending for further consideration on , signalling that it may yet examine the individual accountability of the officers involved. For a mother who had to move the High Court simply to secure a lawful inquiry, the order offers a glimmer of hope that her daughter’s case will now be investigated with the sensitivity and rigour the law demands.
